http://www.planetside.co.uk/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=134&g2_serialNumber=1
I really would like to know who has done this render...
and if anybody has any idea of how it has been done...
really, i love this shot and i would like to reproduce something of the same kind...
That was a experimental Sub-Surface Scattering test done by Matt Fairclough back in 2004 using an earlier version of Terragen 2 Alpha. Sense Terragen lacks SSS i can't see something like this being reproducible. I have to wonder it he used multiple scattering SSS?
I wonder when we can see "sss" in Terragen 2 :P
- Terje
I did something sort of similar last February:
http://www.archer-designs.com/galleries/art-galleries/tg2/fullsize/the-brain-of-the-iceberg-brigade.jpg (http://www.archer-designs.com/galleries/art-galleries/tg2/fullsize/the-brain-of-the-iceberg-brigade.jpg)
I think what Matt did with the rocks should be easily duplicated. Take a sphere, distort it, then add a default shader as its surface shader. Feed a powerfractal into the colour function, translucency and luminosity nodes, and set your colours to be two shades of blue. Increase the translucency to 20 or so and your luminosity to say 0.1. Adjust reflectivity accordingly. Here is a 5 minute test with file.
Quote from: sjefen on March 02, 2009, 07:57:41 PM
I wonder when we can see "sss" in Terragen 2 :P
- Terje
Who knows. After over three years it would be nice to see real SSS. The beauty of SSS is you get all that colored light scattering that is bouncing off of the inside ghaving both well lit sections and darker sections according to the objects density.
I'm afraid it's the difference between rendering something as an R&D project and actually turning it into something that people can use without complaining about massive render times ;) Unfortunately there have been too many other priorities and I was never able to turn this into a shader that I would let people use.
Matt
Oh darn and i was hoping for all of this. ;D
thanks Ryan, I was doing the same thing you did ! (exactly the same way)
thanks for the quick answer Matt.
Hmmm, seems I am fighting against the system ;D Hopefully this makes an appearance sometime in the future. But for now, here is another test trying out a different method to try and simulate the same idea.
What about using a water shader with low reflectivity and a powerfracal in the volume 1 input for internal scattering simulation?
Quote from: Matt on March 03, 2009, 01:22:36 AM
I'm afraid it's the difference between rendering something as an R&D project and actually turning it into something that people can use without complaining about massive render times ;) Unfortunately there have been too many other priorities and I was never able to turn this into a shader that I would let people use.
Matt
But it will be available at some point, right?
- Terje
Quote from: Mohawk20 on March 03, 2009, 11:25:27 AM
What about using a water shader with low reflectivity and a powerfracal in the volume 1 input for internal scattering simulation?
i tried the water shader but didn't manage to do something good with it...
Quote from: Matt on March 03, 2009, 01:22:36 AM
I'm afraid it's the difference between rendering something as an R&D project and actually turning it into something that people can use without complaining about massive render times ;) Unfortunately there have been too many other priorities and I was never able to turn this into a shader that I would let people use.
Matt
Not trying to be a smart ass, but perhaps you should remove that sample image from the planetside gallery because it is misleading to prospective buyers who are not aware that TG isn't able to render (SSS) at this time.
mmmh buzzzzz is right...
I don't think it's a good idea to have a picture that we can't reproduce in the TG2 Gallery :s
I'll have another update shortly, but I think it is very possible to obtain a similar result to the original image.
Cool ! Waiting for it !
Yes. Waiting.
Did Matt clarify whether this will be in the future TG2 releases or not? I wonder how important it is to his end goal.
Quote from: calico on March 03, 2009, 01:45:39 PM
Yes. Waiting.
Did Matt clarify whether this will be in the future TG2 releases or not? I wonder how important it is to his end goal.
There's an End Goal??
Here you go.
Faking SSS - EXR output:
(http://www.archer-designs.com/temp/sss/fake-sss-exr-output.jpg)
Faking SSS - BMP output:
(http://www.archer-designs.com/temp/sss/fake-sss-bmp-output.jpg)
Looks pretty good, maybe a little less Transparency and Reflectivity? Also looks like there's an inner matching object which doesn't quite work or am I may be totally wrong? Admirable effort though. :)
Ryan, what does it look like with light from above, and camera from the side?
very very good !!! Oo
how did you do ?! :D
Mohawk, Here is a view from the side, light changed to be from above, and zoomed in a bit.
(http://www.archer-designs.com/temp/sss/fake-sss-side-top-light.jpg)
Franck, All I did was take two spheres distorted with the same powerfractal, one smaller than the other. The small one is translucent and luminous and the larger one has a water shader.
I have to admit, that is cleaver. Any one have a clip file i can test to see what additional effects can be achieved here?
Really cool effect RArcher.
We will be cleaning out the gallery of old or irrelevant images before the site update. When it was originally put in place several years ago the gallery was intended to show what we were working on and experimenting with. Now that it needs to be representative of a real, shipping product, I agree that images like the SSS experiment need to be removed.
- Oshyan
I tried this stuff myself. Added the water shader but it all turned black. Got rid of the water shader and left luminosity and translucency. I had the translucency up to 1000 and no light was pushing through so is that shader even working right?
There's no light pushing through because although the upper layer is "infinitely" thin it is also 100% opaque.
So the shader is working correct.
That makes no sense. The purpose of a translucent surface is it is supposed to allow light to transport through it without being entirely clear. Is there any way to fix this?
thank you for the explaination Ryan ! I am going to try as soon as I can ^^
Quote from: Confusoid on March 04, 2009, 03:18:16 AM
That makes no sense. The purpose of a translucent surface is it is supposed to allow light to transport through it without being entirely clear. Is there any way to fix this?
The translucent surface is beneath the normal surface, so it makes sense.
Unless I understood it incorrectly.
If this is the case the how does one make the translucent surface on top of the surface of the object rather then beneath it?
Real quick here is a test render i made in Vue 6 using translucency. The edges where the thinner density can be scene there is some light passing through. I would think it would behave the same way using Terragen 2's translucency.
Quote from: Confusoid on March 04, 2009, 06:24:02 AM
If this is the case the how does one make the translucent surface on top of the surface of the object rather then beneath it?
If there's a 100% opaque layer on TOP of a translucent surface then you won't see anything of the translucent layer.
Same goes for any type of layer.
I don't understand your point/question I'm afraid. Creating a surface on top of the surface of the object has to be done like anything else.
Just connect the output of the latest shader to the input of the translucent shader.
I do understand about the opaque layer being on top but i had the translucent shader on top of my surface. I will try again and see what i can do. Maybe i am missing the obvious. ;D
Quote from: Confusoid on March 04, 2009, 07:45:18 AM
I do understand about the opaque layer being on top but i had the translucent shader on top of my surface. I will try again and see what i can do. Maybe i am missing the obvious. ;D
Hmmm...if so then it would be a bit strange, but could also depend heavily on the settings you're using.
If you keep having problems you could ask Ryan self or perhaps post a tgd here to illustrate.
Martin
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on March 04, 2009, 08:15:10 AM
Hmmm...if so then it would be a bit strange, but could also depend heavily on the settings you're using.
If you keep having problems you could ask Ryan self or perhaps post a tgd here to illustrate.
Martin
I will gladly post my tgd here. Also when i turn down the opacity using the default shader below .50 the shaders disappear were as i'd think the shaders should be 50% opacity rather then disappearing entirely.
Here is the file, perhaps it will be of some help.
godamn thanks !!!!
Wow. Cool, guys. Thanks so much.
Nifty, thank you kindly.
Translucency is not "real" translucency in TG2 at this point. The only way to get truly transparent/translucent objects with volume is to use the Water Shader, for now.
- Oshyan
Well, that would explain a lot then. Thank you for the clarification.
I decided to try my own ideas on this, using the water shader with high density for 'volume 1' (with a powerfractal plugged in of course ;)). This is just the 'Planet 1' object, resized to a diameter of 100 and with a powerfractal and compute terrain for displacement and a water shader as only surface shader.
For a first try it's pretty good IMO, but I'll try to tweak it a bit and see what happens.
(I increased exposure of the bmp output in post, but result is result right?)
Really interesting! :o
Second test below. Decreased displacement roughness and decay distance, increased volume density.
Third test rendering now, with the same settings changed further...
Looks very promising!
Just finished another test... I found out that decreasing the decay distance actually works a lot better than increasing it. Now running a render with even less DD.
Below a few version of one render saved in exr.
The first is made a lot darker by decreasing exposure to show what it would look like without water transparency.
The second has a little levels adjustment and shows what the original render looks like, but only a bit lighter.
The last one has extra high exposure and shows what actually goes on in the dark depths of this stone.
I was very happy with the result and will probably finish this project after the next render. (I still have a parted sea that needs some people to save... :P)
And here is the last one.
Rendered at 1 detail (the others were at 0.5), and just a few small tweaks. Adjusted levels and exposure of the exr in post.
I'm very happy with the result, which shows a very crude form of SSS is definitely possible, and it can even look like the preview images posted earlier.
For those who want to take a look, the tgd is also attached.
Interesting results. I tried playing with the water shader by itself using a high volume with a nice icey blue color tone but after waiting for the long water shader render times i just gave up. :P
These renders didn't take so long, though they were over-night renders. Since the planet was a bit smaller but still a planet relatively far from the camera the render times dropped. Orbital or planetary shots always render faster than detailed 'on the ground' shots.
Thanks Mohawk. This looks like Play-Do. :D